HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   All Time Draft (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=181)
-   -   Proposed rule to govern future on the clock trades (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1094341)

TheDevilMadeMe 01-31-2012 01:38 PM

Proposed rule to govern future on the clock trades
 
Proposed rule: If an On The Clock trade gets vetoed, both GMs lose an hour off their clocks on top of any other penalty. This extra hour is a hard penalty, which can drop the GMs in question under the otherwise guaranteed 4 hour minimum clock.

This will apply to all future trades (in other words, not the one in question now).

vecens24 01-31-2012 01:39 PM

Good rule. I agree with this.

BenchBrawl 01-31-2012 01:39 PM

2 hours deduction to the GM on the clock and 1 hour to the GM off the clock for any trade veto or not if the trade took more than half of the clock.If the trade was made quickly on the clock it doesn't matter.I can't believe I actually have a 1 hour penalty while Bugg will only have 2 LOL.

Just an idea.

Hawkey Town 18 01-31-2012 01:40 PM

What happens if the initial trade was made off the clock, vetoed, then that team went on the clock before a new trade could be reworked?

vecens24 01-31-2012 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchBrawl (Post 43335557)
2 hours deduction to the GM on the clock and 1 hour to the GM off the clock.

This is too harsh.

Hawkman 01-31-2012 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 43335537)
Good rule. I agree with this.

Agreed.

TheDevilMadeMe 01-31-2012 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchBrawl (Post 43335557)
2 hours deduction to the GM on the clock and 1 hour to the GM off the clock.

That's how it would work out. This is on top of the 1 hour deduction that already exists for trading on the clock.

TheDevilMadeMe 01-31-2012 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 (Post 43335587)
What happens if the initial trade was made off the clock, vetoed, then that team went on the clock before a new trade could be reworked?

Then it's not a vetoed on the clock trade.

But the second trade would be OTC and the OTC GM would lose an hour the normal way.

vecens24 01-31-2012 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 43335609)
That's how it would work out. This is on top of the 1 hour deduction that already exists for trading on the clock.

Oh, wow I misread that then.

I mean I'm not going to stop it from going through, but I think it's too harsh.

DoMakc 01-31-2012 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 43335483)
Proposed rule: If an On The Clock trade gets vetoed, both GMs lose an hour off their clocks on top of any other penalty. This extra hour is a hard penalty, which can drop the GMs in question under the otherwise guaranteed 4 hour minimum clock.

This will apply to all future trades (in other words, not the one in question now).

I don't think time penalty is a proper penalty, it's just something most of GMs can live with.

BenchBrawl 01-31-2012 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 43335595)
This is too harsh.

that's what you get for being insensitive.

Of course trade on the clock that goes quickly shouldn't be punished at all in fact.

The problem is trades shouldn't be there to annoy the group , just to help people getting a certain player here and there , but now it's getting shady , they are basically deciding on the clock what way they want to go with their complete roster , it's ridiculous.

TheDevilMadeMe 01-31-2012 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoMakc (Post 43335679)
I don't think time penalty is a proper penalty, it's just something most of GMs can live with.

Well yeah, but what other penalty can we give?

Force the GM who was on the clock to keep the player? It's evil and hilarious to think about. :naughty: But no.

TheDevilMadeMe 01-31-2012 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 43335653)
Oh, wow I misread that then.

I mean I'm not going to stop it from going through, but I think it's too harsh.

You don't like it, don't make a veto-worthy trade while on the clock. That's my reasoning. Feel free to vote no.

vecens24 01-31-2012 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 43335837)
You don't like it, don't make a veto-worthy trade while on the clock. That's my reasoning. Feel free to vote no.

Yeah I mean I'm not someone who is going to do that (and I don't think anyone does it on purpose), but we'll see the way this goes. As of right now I'll vote no to this, but I'm not exactly going with this one way or the other with absolute certainty.

tony d 01-31-2012 01:49 PM

I agree with this. 1 hour penalty for both GM's who trade while on the clock is a good rule and 1 I support.

DaveG 01-31-2012 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 43335645)
Then it's not a vetoed on the clock trade.

But the second trade would be OTC and the OTC GM would lose an hour the normal way.

Good, that makes sense and is more then fair.

Leafs Forever 01-31-2012 01:51 PM

It's only fair I vote 'yes' for a rule I helped create :laugh:

vecens24 01-31-2012 01:53 PM

If it goes through, can it be called the LF/Bugg Corollary?

DoMakc 01-31-2012 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 43335781)
Well yeah, but what other penalty can we give?

Force the GM who was on the clock to keep the player? It's evil and hilarious to think about. :naughty: But no.

It's actually easy, a person who trades on the clock trolls other GMs - just give him HFB infraction points.

BenchBrawl 01-31-2012 01:55 PM

We should also considered making a 1 trade OTC rule for the next ATD.

TheDevilMadeMe 01-31-2012 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoMakc (Post 43336211)
It's actually easy, a person who trades on the clock trolls other GMs - just give him HFB infraction points.

Haha, you trade on the clock twice, you lose your avatar. I like it. :handclap:

(pretty sure we're not allowed to do this though)

vecens24 01-31-2012 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchBrawl (Post 43336263)
We should also considered making a 1 trade OTC rule for the next ATD.

I am vehemently opposed to limiting trades in any way. This would be very similar to the 3 trade rule last draft that is pointless.

Leafs Forever 01-31-2012 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchBrawl (Post 43336263)
We should also considered making a 1 trade OTC rule for the next ATD.

That brings about the issue of the old "pick a player than trade him" thing.

To counteract that, we could try a "no trading players rule"; seems harsh because then we can't correct mistakes, but usually only 1-2 of those deals are done per draft anyway.

BenchBrawl 01-31-2012 01:58 PM

The 3trades rule was pointless , the 1 trade max OTC rule wouldn't be , it would have been useful today.

Rob Scuderi 01-31-2012 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoMakc (Post 43336211)
It's actually easy, a person who trades on the clock trolls other GMs - just give him HFB infraction points.

How do you propose defining trading solely to troll? I mean Bugg has been involved in a few OTC trades but it's hard to fault him for trying to shop the pick after he was scooped. How can you differentiate where someone is trolling as opposed to just annoying people by taking their sweet time while OTC?

I think this rule is pretty solid. If you have to trade on the clock for whatever reason, make it reasonable so it doesn't hold things up even more. If these deals didn't have to be reviewed this wouldn't be a problem.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:24 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.